The final stage
of cognitive development involves the transition to learning and thinking
through structured and formal abstract processes primarily derived from
scholarly education, for example regarding combinatorics and statistics. During
this formal stage, the mind tends to
engage in the consideration of hypothetical situations and reasoning about
these situations. In other words, the mind fully engages the facilities of
formal logic. Once entered, the formal operations stage lasts from about the
age of twelve through the remainder of the individual’s life. This stage of
development seems most capable of giving support to the highest levels of the
needs hierarchy; specifically, self-actualization and transcendence.
The
developmental stages identified by Piaget and Inhelder can be viewed as a
series of provisioning operations for the human mind. While the physiological
structure of the brain and its subsequent facilities for information
acquisition, storage and retrieval are systematically defined by biological
processes, the actual acquisition of information, the process of learning, is a
dynamic process that must be engaged by every individual. Piaget suggested that
these dynamic processes proceed according to what he called schemes in The Psychology of Intelligence. He suggested that the initial
scheme that guided the development of the infant from birth was what he called
reflexes. As the infant progresses in its development, the reflexive schemes
are supplanted by schemes developed within the cognitive processes of the
infant’s mind. We observe that, from at least a qualitative viewpoint, one can
see an analog with the progression up the needs hierarchy reflected in the
successive cognitively developed schemes that guide the child’s developmental
stages identified by Piaget.
The provisioning
process appears to follow a very systematic progression, a progression that is
replicated among most individuals. It would seem to us that the manner of this
provisioning, specifically its ordering, has impact on the trust that can be
derived from its subsequent use. The same holds true for computer systems. In
essence, for the individual person or computer to develop a solid basis for the
determination of trust relative to interactions, then the mind in one case, and
the software systems in the other, must be provisioned through a process that
is itself trusted. Once again, it would seem that the needs hierarchy provides
an excellent guide as to what this ordering should be, synchronized by ritual
passages of life, formal releases and handovers.
Physiological
processes are strongly related to structural facilities. In organic systems,
biological mechanisms hold sway over the architecture of physiological
processes. Safety and security, while involving higher cognitive and hence more
variable processes, are grounded in that architecture as well. Belonging,
however, introduces the concept of identity and identification; in computer systems,
this relates to the causality involved in protocol design and in the procedures
through which are determined the keys or other markers of individual identity.
Subsequent to the development and deployment of software on a trusted platform
such as the secure cores that we have considered from time to time, it is
necessary to provide information related to the specific bearer of the secure
core system. This act typically entails the gathering of information keyed to
the identity of the token bearer. To assure the ultimate trustworthiness of the
computer system it is mandatory that all this provisioning be accomplished in a
trustworthy manner.
The higher level
needs, while grounded in the causality of architectures and processes, are
heavily based on acquired information content. In other words, the higher level
needs stimulate both the acquisition of information and the use of that
information to sate the needs-induced appetites. Thus, we see the progression
starting with the provision of trusted platforms, followed by the
|